1. Knox Book Demonizations #61 to #90

I explained in the first post of this series that if complaints by those impugned are lodged, Knox would be charged for some or all of the myriad false accusation in her 2015 book.

Knox even demonizes her loyal hard-pressed lawyers. See the final demonizations below.

Demonization #61

[Chapter 26, Page 325] ‘’ ... “One time, two times?” Luciano asked. “Two times,” I said. “The first time I did this.” I dropped my head down as if I’d been struck and opened my mouth wide in surprise. “Then I turned around toward her and she gave me another.” “So you said what you said, and then you had a crisis of weeping. Then they brought you tea, some coffee, some pastries? When did this happen? If you can be precise,” Luciano asked. “They brought me things only after I made declarations”—depositions—“that Patrick had raped and murdered Meredith, and I had been at the house covering my ears….’‘

AK tries to explain her false accusation of Lumumba .... by falsely accusing Ficarra of assault.

Demonization #62

[Chapter 26, Page 325] ‘’ ... “Before they asked me to make other declarations—I can’t say what time it was—but at a certain point I asked, ‘Shouldn’t I have a lawyer or not?’ because I didn’t honestly know, because I had seen shows on television that usually when you do these things you have a lawyer, but okay, so should I have one? And at least one of them told me it would be worse for me, because it showed that I didn’t want to collaborate with the police. So I said no.”

AK accuses the police of violating her right to counsel.

Demonization #63

[Chapter 26, Page 314] ‘‘He [Quintavalle] hadn’t wanted to get involved in the murder case and had come forward only at the urging of a journalist friend in August 2008. I relaxed a little. The jury would see what was true and what wasn’t. The media purposely did not. “A New Hole Appears in Amanda Knox’s Alibi” and “Witness Contradicts Amanda Knox’s Account.” News stories like this infuriated my family and friends. But strangers, no doubt, would think, There goes Amanda, lying again.’‘

AK accuses Marco Quintavalle of coming forward at the encouragement of a journalist friend. She implies this is for the attention.

Demonization #64

[Chapter 27, Page 330] ‘‘That had been in September 2008. By then it was July 2009. Ten months had passed. On the day the court recessed for the summer, Judge Massei ordered the prosecution to give us the data. They still held back some information, but within the papers they did give us, our forensic experts found the prosecution had failed to disclose a fact that should have prevented us from ever being charged. There was no way to tie this knife—and therefore, me—to Meredith’s murder. I’d always known that it was impossible for Meredith’s DNA to be on the knife, and I’d long known that the prosecution had leaked assumed evidence to the media. Now I knew that these mistakes weren’t missteps. Stefanoni and her team had made giant, intentionally misleading leaps, to come up with results designed to confirm our guilt.’‘

AK accuses the DNA expert, Stefanoni, of withholding evidence, and then intentionally misconstruing the findings.

Demonization #64

[Chapter 27, Page 331] ‘‘And for Mignini, appearing to be right superseded everything else. As I found out that summer, the determined prosecutor had a bizarre past, was being tried for abuse of office, and had a history of coming up with peculiar stories to prove his cases. His own case is currently pending on appeal.
In 2002, on the advice of a psychic, he reopened a decades-old cold case. The Monster of Florence was a serial killer who attacked courting couples in the 1970s and ’80s. After murdering them he would take the women’s body parts with him. Mignini exhumed the body of Dr. Francesco Narducci after the psychic told him that Narducci, who died in 1985, was the Monster and that he hadn’t committed suicide, as had been supposed. Instead, Mignini believed that Narducci had been murdered by members of a satanic sect, who feared the Monster would expose them. He charged twenty people, including government officials, with being members of the same secret sect as the Monster.
Mignini had a habit of taking revenge on anyone who disagreed with him, including politicians, journalists, and officials. His usual tactic was to tap their telephones and sue or jail them. The most famous instance was the arrest of Italian journalist Mario Spezi, and the interrogation of Spezi’s American associate Douglas Preston, a writer looking into the Narducci case, who subsequently fled Italy.
In the hour we had each week to discuss my case, my lawyers had never thought there was a reason for us to talk about Mignini’s outlandish history. Carlo and Luciano told me only when it became apparent that, for Mignini, winning his case against Raffaele and me was a Hail Mary to save his career and reputation.
“The whole story is insane!” I said. I couldn’t take it in. It struck me that I was being tried by a madman who valued his career more than my freedom or the truth about Meredith’s murder!’‘

But see here and also here and especially here. Knox falsely accuses Mignini of framing her and RS in order to “save his career”. Myriad facts wrong. Mignini never took revenge on anyone, ever. The vindictive Florence prosecutor and judge who pursued him lost out, and were reversed on two appeals. He charged no-one with being members of a secret sect; he charged them with obstruction of justice, and the final word from the Supreme Court was that he was correct. Preston & Spezi were trying to frame an innocent man, for their gain. The psychic (who Mignini had arrested) did not spark any investigation, ever.

Demonization #66

[Chapter 27, Page 332] ‘‘Our lawyers’ arguments stirred up all my outrage. The prosecution had kept Raffaele and me in jail for twenty-one months for no reason. If the judges and jury were fair, they’d see that the prosecution had tried to thwart us.’‘

AK falsely accuses the prosecution of trying to keep her and RS in jail without cause. Every judge who reviewed their case in 2007 and 2008 and made the actual decisions with MANY reasons given took a harder line. Example here and another here. There would have been zero equivalent reviews in the US.

Demonization #67

[Chapter 27, Page 335] ‘‘On the witness stand, Marco Chiacchiera of the Squadra Mobile had explained that “investigative intuition” had led him to the knife. That flimsy explanation did not help me understand how the police could pull a random knife from Raffaele’s kitchen drawer and decide that it was, without the smallest doubt, the murder weapon. Or why they never analyzed knives from the villa or Rudy Guede’s apartment.’‘

AK falsely accuses Marco Chiacchiera of improper procedures for collecting/handling evidence which she describes completely wrong. All his steps were correct. He was a very good cop. See Cardiol’s series starting here.

Demonization #68

[Chapter 27, Page 344] ‘‘The prosecution contended that, as representatives of the state, they were the impartial party and maintained that their conclusions were legitimate. Our experts, they said, couldn’t be trusted because they were being paid to defend us. And our critiques, objections, and conclusions were just smoke screens created to confuse the judges and jury.’‘

AK falsely accuses the prosecution of trying to ‘‘slime’’ defence witnesses. Actually all the real sliming of witnesses was by the RS and AK defense. Every one was at one time or another slimed, no holds barred. Knox “forgets” that one of her own lawyers (Dr Costa) walked off the job in disgust.

Demonization #69

[Chapter 30, Page 384] ‘‘But when the emotionless guard pushed the paper across the desk, I saw, to my astonishment, and outrage, that it was a new indictment—for slander. For telling the truth about what had happened to me during my interrogation on November 5-6, 2007. In June 2009, I testified that Rita Ficarra had hit me on the head to make me name Patrick. I also testified that the police interpreter hadn’t translated my claims of innocence and that she’d suggested that I didn’t remember assisting Patrick Lumumba when he sexually assaulted Meredith.’‘

AK falsely repeats the accusations of assault and a brutal interrogation. See our Interrogation Hoax series.

Demonization #70

[Chapter 30, Page 385] ‘’ According to Prosecutor Mignini, truth was slander. All told, the prosecution claimed that I’d slandered twelve police officers—everyone who was in the interrogation room with me that night—when I said they’d forced me to agree that Meredith had been raped and pushed me into saying Patrick’s name. It was my word against theirs, because that day the police apparently hadn’t seen fit to flip the switch of the recording device that had been secretly bugging me every day in the same office of the questura leading up to the interrogation.’‘

AK falsely accuses the police of lying, and deliberately not recording the ‘‘brutal interrogation’‘. See our Interrogation Hoax series.

Demonization #71

[Chapter 30, Page 385] ‘‘Mignini and his co-prosecutor, Manuela Comodi, had signed the document. The judge’s signature was also familiar: Claudia Matteini, the same woman who’d rejected me for house arrest two years earlier because she said I’d flee Italy. I hadn’t expected this maneuver by the police and prosecution, but it now made sense. They couldn’t admit that one of their own had hit me or that the interpreter hadn’t done her job. Above all, they couldn’t admit that they’d manipulated me into a false admission of guilt. They had their reputations to uphold and their jobs to keep.’‘

Who hit her? No-one did. Even her lawyers said she made that up. AK falsely accuses the courts of trying to frame her to protect their reputations and jobs. But they were all career staff with nothing to lose.

Demonization #72

[Chapter 30, Page 385] ‘‘I’d calculated that I could be released in twenty-one years for good behavior. Now this looked unlikely. If I were called to testify in the slander trial, I’d have to restate the truth: I had been pressured and hit. They’d say I was lying. If the judges and jury believed the police, that would wipe out my good behavior and add three years to my jail time. Could Mignini, Comodi, and the whole questura keep going after me again and again? Would I be persecuted forever?’‘

AK falsely accuses the courts of persecuting her. Nobody “called” her to testify, that was her strong choice (as was her attempt to bamboozle Mignini in Dec 2007) and she blew it big-time.

Demonization #73

[Chapter 31, Page 397] The prosecution had based their case on misinterpreted and tainted forensic evidence and had relied heavily on speculation. But Judge Massei’s faith was blind. Patrizia Stefanoni would not “offer false interpretations and readings,” he wrote.

Demonization #74

[Chapter 31, Page 398] For example, Madison wrote, “Witnesses: the prosecution knowingly used unreliable witnesses.
“Interrogation: the police were under enormous pressure to solve the murder quickly.
“There’s a pattern of the police/prosecution ignoring indications of your innocence. This must be pointed out. You were called guilty a month before forensic results, you were still considered guilty even though what you said in your interrogation wasn’t true, obviously false witnesses were used against you.’‘

Demonization #75

[Chapter 31, Page 399] ‘‘I knew that the most critical point was to be able to say why I’d named Patrick during my interrogation.’‘

AK falsely repeats the accusation that she only falsely accused PL because of assault. See our Interrogation Hoax series.

Demonization #76

[Chapter 31, Page 400] ‘‘According to Kassin, there are different types of false confessions. The most common is “compliant,” which usually happens when the suspect is threatened with punishment or isolation. The encounter becomes so stressful, so unbearable, that suspects who know they’re innocent eventually give in just to make the uncomfortably harsh questioning stop. “You’ll get thirty years in prison if you don’t tell us,” says one interrogator. “I want to help you, but I can’t unless you help us,” says another.
This was exactly the good cop/bad cop routine the police had used on me.’‘

Demonization #77

[Chapter 31, Page 401] Three years after my “confession,” I’d blocked out some of my interrogation. But the brain has ways of bringing up suppressed memories. My brain chooses flashbacks - sharp, painful flashes of memory that flicker, interrupting my conscious thoughts. My adrenaline responds as if it’s happening in that moment. I remember the shouting, the figures of looming police officers, their hands touching me, the feeling of panic and of being surrounded, the incoherent images my mind made up to try to explain what could have happened to Meredith and to legitimize why the police were pressuring me.

[Chapter 31, Page 401] In my case they’d put several interrogators in a room with me. For hours they yelled, screamed, kept me on edge. When they exhausted themselves, a fresh team replaced them. But I wasn’t even allowed to leave to use the bathroom.

[Chapter 31, Page 402] It had been the middle of the night. I’d already been questioned for hours at a time, days in a row. They tried to get me to contradict myself by homing in on what I’d done hour by hour, to confuse me, to cause me to lose track and get something wrong. They said I had no alibi. They lied, saying that Raffaele had told them I’d asked him to lie to the police. They wouldn’t let me call my mom. They wouldn’t let me leave the interrogation room. They were yelling at me in a language I didn’t understand. They hit me and suggested that I had trauma- induced amnesia. They encouraged me to imagine what could have happened, encouraged me to “remember” the truth because they said I had to know the truth. They threatened to imprison me for thirty years and restrict me from seeing my family. At the time, I couldn’t think of it as anything but terrifying and overwhelming.

Demonization #78

[Chapter 32, Page 413] Under the judges’ questioning, Curatolo, talked about his personal history: “I was an anarchist, then I read the Bible and became a Christian anarchist,” he said. He confirmed that he was now in prison, adding, “I haven’t quite understood why yet.” Asked if he’d used heroin in 2007, he answered, “I have always used drugs. I want to clarify that heroin is not a hallucinogen.”

Demonization #79

[Chapter 32, Page 414] Before the first trial, the defense began requesting forensic data from the prosecution in the fall of 2008, but DNA analyst Patrizia Stefanoni dodged court orders from two different judges. She gave the defense some of, but never all, the information. Now it was Conti and Vecchiotti’s turn to try to get the raw data that Stefanoni had interpreted to draw conclusions about the genetic profiles on the knife and the bra clasp. Stefanoni continued to argue that the information was unnecessary. Not until May 11, under additional orders from Judge Hellmann, did she finally comply.

AK again falsely accuses Patrizia Stefanoni of deliberately withholding evidence. It is documented that she withheld none. See it here.

Demonization #80

[Chapter 32, Page 416] When Luciano came to Capanne for our weekly Wednesday meeting, he told me that a special award had been given to officers in the Squadra Mobile for its work on Meredith’s murder investigation. The citation read: “To recognize elevated professional capabilities, investigative acumen, and an uncommon operative determination. They conducted a complex investigation that concluded in the arrest of the authors of the murder of the British student that had taken place in the historic center of Perugia.”
Four of the sixteen police officers receiving the Police Holiday award were named in the police’s slander charge against me.
They included Vice Superintendent Marco Chiacchiera, whose “investigative instinct” led him to randomly select Raffaele’s kitchen knife from the drawer as the murder weapon; Substitute Commissioner and Homicide Chief Monica Napoleons; and Chief Inspector Rita Ficarra.
The news infuriated me. I knew it was just another face-saving ploy. How could they commend the officer who had hit me during my interrogation and those who had done so much wrong?
But I wasn’t surprised. It was completely in line with the prosecution’s tactics to discredit my supporters and me. Mignini had charged my parents with slander for an interview they gave to a British newspaper in which they told the story of my being slapped during the interrogation. He was the one who had charged me with slandering the police.

AK rehashes her false accusations. These are all repeats from elsewhere. See above.

Demonization #81

[Afterword] ‘‘Unlike the previous high court hearing, the justices listened to all sides without interrupting the defence’‘

AK accuses the Chieffi Court (Cassation 2013) of misconduct in how they handled the appeal. What “all sides”? The Perugia and Florence prosecutions were not ever even there.

Knox Sticks It To Her Own Lawyers

Demonization #82

[Chapter 16, Page 194] ‘’ ... Luciano looked revolted, and Carlo urged me, “Anytime Argirò calls you alone into an office, tell him you don’t want to speak with him. He could be talking about sex because Meredith was supposedly the victim of a sexual crime and he wants to see what you’ll say. It could be a trap.”

Demonization #83

[Chapter 20, Page 230] ‘’ ... “It’s risky,” Carlo said. “Mignini will try to pin things on you.” “He already has,” I told them. The first time I met Mignini at the questura, I hadn’t understood who he was, what was going on, what was wrong, why people were yelling at me, why I couldn’t remember anything. I thought he was someone who could help me (the mayor), not the person who would sign my arrest warrant and put me behind bars…’‘

Knox claims CDV seems to think that the prosecutor goes around framing people. A felony and disbarment act.

Demonization #84

[Chapter 21, Page 250] ‘’ ... My lawyers complained to the judges that the prosecution was using the media to our disadvantage, but the judge said that whatever was reported in the press wouldn’t be held against us. The flow of information between the prosecution and the media was an accepted but unacknowledged fact….’‘

AK claims Ghirga and CDV made formal complaints about the media attention. In reality, the attention came from the US press, much by the instigation of the Knox family. For example see this here.

Demonization #85

[Chapter 21, Page 254] ‘’ ... “Amanda, the investigators are in a conundrum,” Carlo said. “They found so much of Guede’s DNA in Meredith’s room and on and inside her body. But the only forensic evidence they have of you is outside her bedroom. Raffaele’s DNA evidence is only on the bra hook. If you and Raffaele participated in the murder, as the prosecution believes, your DNA should be as easy to find as Guede’s.” “But Carlo, no evidence doesn’t mean we cleaned up. It means we weren’t there!” “I know,” Carlo said, sighing. “But they’ve already decided that you and Raffaele faked a break-in to nail Guede. I know it doesn’t make sense. They’re just adding another link to the story. It’s the only way the prosecution can involve you and Raffaele when the evidence points to a break-in and murder by Guede.”

Again, Knox claims CDV seems to think the prosecution is framing AK and RS. This claim was never reported. A felony and disbarment act.

Demonization #86

[Chapter 22, Page 270] ‘’ ... Carlo, the pessimist, said, “Don’t get your hopes up, Amanda. I’m not sure we’ll win. There’s been too much attention on your case, too much pressure on the Italian legal system to think that you won’t be sent to trial.”

Again, Knox claims CDV never makes a formal complain about this, or even says it publicly. A felony and disbarment act.

Demonization #87

[Chapter 23, Page 273] ‘’ ... The first day of the pretrial was mostly procedural. Almost immediately Guede’s lawyers requested an abbreviated trial. I had no idea the Italian justice system offered this option. Carlo later told me that it saves the government money. With an abbreviated trial, the judge’s decision is based solely on evidence; no witnesses are called. The defendant benefits from this fast-track process because, if found guilty, he has his sentence cut by a third…’‘

AK accuses CDV and Ghirga of incompetence and malpractice. She has been in custody a year, and they are only ‘‘now’’ just telling her about this?! In fact the very public ganging-up of the Knox and Sollecito teams against Guede in mid 2008 forced him to separate for his own good.

Demonization #88

[Chapter 27, Page 330] Carlo, who’d never sugarcoated my situation, said, “These are small-town detectives. They chase after local drug dealers and foreigners without visas. They don’t know how to conduct a murder investigation correctly. Plus, they’re bullies. To admit fault is to admit that they’re not good at their jobs. They suspected you because you behaved differently than the others. They stuck with it because they couldn’t afford to be wrong.”

CDV still never files a formal complaint (in Italy) about this. The ECHR complaint is not the same thing.

Demonization #89

[Acknowledgements] ‘’ ... And finally, Luciano Ghirga, Carlo Dalla Vedova, and Maria Del Grosso, for defending and caring about me as if I were one of their own.’‘

Sure thing. Way to drop your lawyers in it. See above.

“Some Credit Where Credit is Due”

Demonization #90

‘’ ... I wouldn’t have been able to write this memoir without Linda Kulman. Somehow, with her Post-it Notes and questions, with her generosity, dedication, and empathy, she turned my rambling into writing, and taught me so much in the meantime. I am grateful to her family—Ralph, Sam, Julia—for sharing her with me for so long.’‘

4. Does ‘‘Laura From Prison’’ Even Really Exist?

At the very end are these little quotes:

‘’ ... The writing of this memoir came to a close after I had been out of prison for over a year. I had to relive everything, in soul-wrenching detail. I read court documents and the transcripts of hearings, translated them, and quoted them throughout. Aided by my own diaries and letters, all the conversations were rendered according to my memory. The names of certain people, including friends, prisoners, and guards, have been changed to respect their privacy.’‘

‘’ ... The names and identifying characteristics of some of the individuals featured throughout this book have been changed to protect their privacy.’‘

Okay, so does that mean that this friend ‘‘Laura’’ is completely made up? Think about it:

’‘Laura’’ is American, living in Ecuador, and gets arrested in Italy. Sounds very worldly.

AK’s roommate, the one she admired, is also named ‘‘Laura’‘

This ‘‘Laura’’ was apparently railroaded for drug use. AK accuses the police of trying to smear her for drugs.

@Chimera, great spotlight on her “Book of Crimes”, everyone’s but her own, that is. The photo of Knox with her lawyers is so bad it’s funny. Three space cadets caught in their own trap.

The made up names of roommates in the book, par for the course. Truth is very flexible for Knox.

@davidmulhern, your reference to West Seattle Herald “Amanda’s View” was worth a look. There she wrote on March 26, 2016 of her reaction to the first anniversary of “my definitive acquittal” as she calls it.

Her musings on what should be a most liberating and joyous occasion for her, prove she has quite the opposite reaction! Very very odd, isn’t it?

She is so bummed about the day a foreign Supreme Court released her from a murder conviction.

I’d be ecstatic. Yet Knox says she felt blah and distracted, instead of exhileration that her innocence was confirmed. That’s a strange twisted psychology.

Instead of real joy on the anniversary of her important verdict, she goes back in her mind to prison and focuses on a cellmate who tore up one of her notebooks!!!!

This cellmate she fictionally calls Bernadette.

Could that be a reference to the lady of Lourdes? Check out the google pix of Bernadette de Soubirous, or Bernadette of Lourdes. Bernadette looks a lot like Meredith in some pictures.

Anyway, this Perugian prison Bernadette destroyed Knox’s journal of tripe. In doing so, Knox felt erased. She was furious. She felt subjugated by this roommate. She says she was very sensitive to this subjugation.

Bernadette scrapped Foxy’s scribblings and that was what Amanda focused on at the first anniversary of her deliverance from a near life-sentence. Talk about getting one’s priorities skewed.

She says she can’t feel peace, that she’s still “sensitive”. One assumes Knox still smarts at the momentary subjugation of herself to the cellmate.

She says she still has a jagged edge, a wound. The article ends in a tortured victory paen that even if one’s words are destroyed, a person still has his individualistic being. “The body never forgets”.

Well, she has matured somewhat to know she is not just a pile of words, but something real despite others’ opinions. There’s been some growth of awareness that she is more than ink on paper, a feeling sadly missing in her college years.

The cellmate or roommate in prison whom Knox names “Bernadette” sat on a bunk bed and tore out pages one by one from Amanda’s journal. Knox says she was “struck dumb, numb” by this act.

But I think only of the pages torn out of Meredith’s life. The pages, the chapters, the beautiful photographs torn out of Meredith’s life book.

Meredith’s body didn’t forget either, and it was her body’s DNA on a knife and Meredith’s actual blood in a footprint on a rug that convinced me of Knox’s guilt, and her boyfriend’s. He hung up the telephone when police asked him if the intruder had cut himself on glass when entering the cottage. Raffaele hung up!

If Knox were innocent, she would welcome the date of March 26th. Instead, for her it is a day to look at what? What does she focus on?

On one roommate destroying another.

One roommate destroyed another. Think Via della Pergola.

Bernadette of Lourdes became a saint, so she had seen the truth.

Then look at the next “Amanda’s View: Inner cityscape”. In that one Knox writes about the mind and what lies beneath. Her images seem like the catacombs underneath Rome! Those were graves full of skulls and bones.

Knox is on Raffaele’s wavelength with the graves and sepulchers and burial imagery. Death death death. Both of them still fixated on it. Not released from it by any means.

So my interpretation of both these pieces of Knox’s writing put together, is that the Supreme Court decision which came from Rome was built over a pile of graves or death as in the murder of innocents.

This is why Knox can’t celebrate it like an innocent person would.

Using the metaphor of her inner cityscape of the mind as she writes for the Herald newspaper, she says a cathedral or a coliseum in one’s inner cityscape may crumble. Then a person builds on the remains or around the rubble, but a ghost remains.

Former glory and horror are all at the same place, she explains in reference to the Byzantine and Roman ruins whose height of civility and depths of destruction are all in one place, an archaeological mound.

Could these be two metaphorical confessions of guilt?

There’s no hoopla nor excitement on the anniversary of her important not guilty ruling. So weird, why isn’t she glad. She thinks her lack of joy is because she’s still angry at the unjust incarceration, but there’s little pleasure in the not guilty ruling with all the years it has spared her.

The article before this anniversary piece is about the Detroit Amanda versus the Seattle Amanda. She traveled to Detroit with friends and laments a city in ruins (much like Roman ruins in other piece.) It sounds like she might (might, just a guess) be thinking about opening a coffee bar of her own with art and poets and the hippie scene of coffee shops. A return to barrista work, the last place she was happy and free.

And the falling in love theme throughout the haunted Rome cityscape, does sound like a recent breakup with boyfriend Colin. Knox writes there’s no love like first love. Colin wasn’t the first, seems implied.

If she has a capital sum to invest in a small coffee shop, would she want to hire an employee like the girl Patrick hired to tend his customers? Ouch.

The Boninsegna ‘motivations’ justifying the not guilty verdict from Florence (handed down in Jan or Feb) of Knox’s own callunia at trial against police personnel was published today (April 9).

It seems to me to be rather peculiar. Boninsegna bought into the ‘overly extended interrogation’ story; used her memoriales to demonstrate her ‘agitated state’ and back reasoned this to conclude that she was sufficiently ‘agitated’ to have been obliged to finger Lumumba. I do find this very hard to accept.

There is no acknowledgement of the fact that she was NOT asked to be at the police station, thus the ‘extended interrogation ‘argument fails (for me).

Anyway, here is a very concise report in Italian, which no doubt google translate will cope with adequately.

Thanks Sallyoo on Boninsegna. Also some emails from Italy came in. Any more translation of the reporting you can provide for a main post?

Reads like Marasca/Bruno Part Deux just when Marasca/Bruno Part Un has become such a ridiculed bit of work (we had 3 series taking it apart, and theres another in the works) with of course Guede’s help.

That daffy “interrogation” narrative is straight from the RS/AK defense and even Hellmann did not buy that Knox was forced to finger Patrick.

Did Boninsegna here not read ANY trial transcripts? There certainly was no “interrogation” and we showed in our long series how court documents proved that at great length.

Our own problem is we showed it in English, and so mainly to Brits and Americans. Italy never seemed the bigger problem before.

There is no PMF or Wiki or TJMK equivalent in Italian, I guess nobody saw the need, after Knox was on the stand mid 2009 guilt was so obvious to all there.

So on this we have a very assymetric situation: (1) more cynicism and anger among the population in Italy, (2) far more cold hard facts laid out in the US and UK.

This outcome could certainly be appealed. Dr Mignini won both his own appeals against a rogue Florence prosecutor and judge.

However, by far the bigger deal, I reckon, is the actions against the RS and AK books.

They are both in Italian, and cases against RS and against Oggi as a proxy for AK proceed now, with the Oggi verdict later this month.

Chimera has just listed 90 demonizations and Hopeful above looks deeper into what was behind some.

Amanda named Patrick Lumumba because “in ‘offering up’ that name to those who were interrogating her so forcibly she was hoping to put an end to that pressure”.

The Seattle student’s words* were “the confused narration of a dream, albeit rather macabre” and “not the description of something that had really occurred”.
(*Alternatively, la Nazione says: For the Court, the account contained in her statement [to police] and in her note written immediately after appears to be «the confused narration of a dream, albeit rather macabre, rather than the description of something that had really occurred». For the Court, this «confirms the state in which Amanda found herself» at that moment and rules out that her aim «could have been to keep quiet about the name of the actual author of the deed».)

“numerous procedural irregularities” and “the obsessive duration of the investigators”

Amanda’s declarations “were clearly characterised by a psychological condition which became” for her “a truly unsupportable weight”. And therefore “understandable” that “succumbing to the pressure and tiredness she had hoped to put an end to that situation, giving those who were interrogating her what they at base wanted to hear – a name, a killer”.

= = =

Except Amanda herself said she truly believed at the time that she named him that Patrick was the killer.

Also, as to the written note, ‘immediately after’ actually means “after a period of sleeping”, that is, no tiredness and no pressure.

The provision of a name may indicate an intention not to hide the killer’s name, but it may also indicate the opposite, an intention to hide the killer’s name. And in any case, why place herself at the scene? Is there some confused recollection, rather than dreaming, going on?

Why ‘confused narration’ is assigned to a dream-state, rather than to a drugged-state or mentally-impaired state or combination, is not explained in the news reports.

Also, the confusion is not in the narration (Patrick did it!) so much as in the afterwards-claimed state of mind of the narrator in making that accusation (and placing herself at the scene covering her ears).

We get the sense Knox wants to write about the murder and how she felt (it is always about how she feels). She knows she cannot. She knows how her own words – in her email to her circle after the murder, to explain, “how i found my roommate murdered the morning of friday, november 2nd.” It is striking she uses the word “found”, like Sollecito who told Mirror Kate Mansey how his girlfriend was “first to find the body”.

The official version, of course, is Filomena Romanelli’s friend Luca Altieri, who broke down the door, was first to find it, closely followed by Filomena and Battistelli. Knox and Sollecito had made their way to the back of the kitchen and had seen nothing.

So, Knox’s first written words gives herself away. In her mind, she was the last person to see Meredith alive and the first to see (find) her dead. She has to keep reminding herself. In her Prison Diary she hints, “maybe I had seen Meredith’s death”. This she tells us, is all the police’s fault (of course). So we see a pull of Amanda the writer who wants to bare all, the ultimate creative writer versus Amanda who no way wants to face time jail! So, how to reveal all without incrimination?

Knox is well versed in the use of simile and metaphor. Her WSH blog pieces are saturated with them. Thus her parent’s divorce could have been a “dramatic black feather” were she aware of it. We immediately think of Meredith’s white feather. Knox has the sociopathic trait of arrested psychological development. Many of her pieces centre around when she was a young girl, stories of Oma and “flashes of light” in the garden. We are told her greatest achievement is at age twelve, for which she awarded herself a “gold-colored charm-bracelet star—the miraculous goal I kicked all the way from the half-line”. So the Amanda-sized character she writes of is an arrested eternal twelve-year old.

Her feelings about the controversial acquittal this time last year, stripped of the literary devices of metaphor and simile are not of joy, relief and vindication, but heavy, choked, unable to breathe, sluggish, angry and raging. The reason, we are told, is because of her journal being destroyed by Bernadette, the cellmate, who is “paranoid”. This is because, “My journal was my freedom.”
However, as we all know, having each of us having lost a crucial piece of work at some stage or other, and having to rewrite it all over again, it is not irretrievable. In fact, quite often, it is much quicker to write anew, and often in an improved, more succinct, form. It remains in the hard drive of one’s memory.

So, the real reason Knox tells us all of this on her great anniversary? “Because I have a terrible memory, my journal was where I documented the memories I wanted to keep.” By extrapolation, she is telling us the diary pages she tore out leading up to the murder, are the memories she doesn’t want to keep. She is explaining to the reader why she told police she could not remember anything of the night of the murder. (“A terrible memory.” Not lying.)

In her Prison Diary she writes of her revulsion at discovering one of her cellmates is a child killer. It is as if Knox wants to understand how others might see her, as a then convicted killer, in writing it. In her Prison Diary, Knox has to remember she is supposed to be innocent so she writes things such how Meredith did not deserve to die like this, nobody does, of course not.
In the meantime, using the double-speak, Knox concludes, “I do hope and work to feel peace, a wearing down of that jagged edge, a healing of the wound. “

A startling jarring image of the jagged stab wound in Meredith’s neck. It will never heal. This time, no metaphor or simile necessary. The reader gets the picture.

@Slow Jane, incisive comments, really remarkable. I enjoyed every word of your analysis of La Fox. You saw that in her mega email home right after the crime she begins with: I found my roommate’s body. Yes and No. The mix of truth and lies, Knox does that best.

Most suspicious of all is her admission that she likes to write down in a journal any memory she holds dear. That tells on her because it’s a known fact that several of her late October 2007 entries right before the time of the murder were torn out of her journal. Those must be memories she does NOT want to keep. Of course she was hiding them from herself and from police. As she says herself, “I have a terrible memory”. That statement might be taken two ways, as in, I remember something that occurred that was terrible. Well wouldn’t it be a terrible memory to have seen Meredith’s death? Or to recall some petty argument she had detailed in a journal that had set off such an unreasonable and regrettable backlash against the single young woman she didn’t know very well.

And Knox’s native eagerness to write down everything that happens to her, an impulse which she frustratingly had to squelch to stonewall police, that energy had to find an outlet. My guess? She may have penned that note advertising Meredith’s room for rent. It was a vacancy advertisement seeking to find a tenant to replace Meredith. The note was found tacked up IIRC where students could read it near downtown Perugia. Very suspicious, very strange. Seemed it was a prank making a mockery of the roommate’s departure in a tongue-in-cheek laughter at her death. It was a disguised celebratory triumph, sneaking a bit of fun message in code that suggested, “Maybe I killed my roomie, now does anybody need a place to stay and study with me?” Cold, callous, calculating American psycho, if Knox wrote that note.

The note was in handwriting dissimilar to Amanda’s normal script. It has never been resolved who authored it.

But we know who the compulsive writer is in the cottage, and prankster.

How risky was it to tack up that note if she were seen? Did she need a second audacity after the first adrenaline rush faded? Was she now angry at Meredith because the police seemed so sympathetic to the poor girl in death? Sympathetic to Meredith but not to her, if she felt police were irritating her with their raised eyebrows at her, suspicions, questions, and calls to the Questura for the boring waits? In that case perhaps it was an enjoyment to see the note and admire her daring, sniggering every day as she walked past it? Or elbow Raffaele in the ribs while walking and whisper, look over there at the public notice board. There’s some ad about the cottage, wonder who did that? “The police are so stupid,” Sollecito would reply. “I’d like to run over one of them in my car.” (but by 2016 he is on TV as an expert in justice)

You picked up on the contrast of the black feather of divorce that Knox refuses to tie onto her yarn lifeline, with the white feather of Meredith’s elegant life. Great comparison. There is so much acuity in your examination of Knox. She’s hiding in plain sight.

@Hopeful: The handwriting on the room-advert looks remarkably like Knox to me, with one or two letters disguised. A person will often write in block capitals, thinking this disguises the handwriting, but it doesn’t!

If it was a ‘prank’ by Knox and Sollecito then it tells us they are grossly disturbed and have no conscience at all.

No sooner was Knox ensconced in jail, than she wrote of Meredith’s murder as a horror story thriller video, which could also be seen as a coded message of her role in the murder. A kind of ‘showing off’.

Prankster Knox is a great term. Her notorious short stories are full of unpleasant criminal pranks. Kyle the Baby Brother feeding his rape victim Hard-A. 13-year old Aislinn and her harassed Mom in The Model. Hilarious! NOT.

Then there is her handwritten ‘memoriale’ pranking Patrick. How Knox and Sollecito must have laughed in private. Sollecito still openly ‘jokes’ about how Guede is the only one person who did it. He grinned as he posed with his knife at the questura, wearing his ‘strange intruder’ outfit, as described by Guede.

Yes, Hopeful, we see a Knox who claims innocence, yet in her writings yearns to express her sadistic prankster side.

Similarly, we see a gloating Sollecito, a grave memorial app entrepreneur and a murder reporter. Knox tours the USA, mingling in with the wrongfully convicted - mostly Black, Hispanic and Male. Hilarious to see a white, middle-class rightfully convicted female posing alongside them.

@Slow Jane, to me, your last Comment is so brilliant that I cannot resist selectively quoting from it:
Knox wrote of Meredith’s murder as a horror story thriller video, which could also be seen as a coded message of her role in the murder. A kind of ‘showing off’....
Her notorious short stories are full of unpleasant criminal pranks….
There is her handwritten ‘memoriale’ pranking Patrick. How Knox and Sollecito must have laughed in private. Sollecito still openly’jokes’ about how Guede is the only one person who did it. He grinned as he posed with his knife at the questura, wearing his ‘strange intruder’ outfit, as described by Guede.
Yes, Hopeful, we see a Knox who claims innocence, yet in her writing….
We see a gloating Sollecito, a grave memorial app entrepreneur and a murder reporter. Knox tours the USA, mingling in with the wrongfully convicted - mostly Black, Hispanic and Male. Hilarious to see a white, middle-class rightfully convicted female posing alongside them.
It doesn’t get any more macabre than this. Or maybe it will…”
Thank you.

For those that might not know it, you refer in this comment quoted below to the theory that Judge Chiari was replaced by Judge Hellmann at the last minute (and promptly resigned) because of a secret deal between rogue masons.

It transpires that the judge in the recent calunnia MR Giampaolo Boninsegna, has directly lifted quotes from the Helllmann report, but without attribution.

It could be, he is simply quoting from the defence submissions. Alternatively, it could be he is a part of a masonic faction with grievances to settle.”

Here below is the post on that. Chief Judge De Nunzio and ex Judge Hellmann are both avid masons as are some of those Mignini later charged for obstruction of justice (amazing guy!)

Their reach clearly extends to Florence, and was behind the prosecution (reversed on appeal as Chimera explains) of Dr Mignini - when someone else, not him, acted on a judge’s go-ahead to tape that same prosecutor.

Are these mason one and the same as the Monster of Florence cabal? Links, at minimum, are widely presumed in Italy. The blatantly dishonest Doug Preston book does not explain this but two books by the chief investigator Michele Giuttari do so.

We are all with you in the blame game and you as a professional in the field with many analyses and court appearances know more than almost any of us how hard the real evidence is.

I do agree that there is almost no sign yet that the full force of the State Department was brought to bear. But there is however murkiness at the middle levels.

Judge Heavey and Steve Moore and others heavily permeated that department with their radically wrong views; the Italy-America group in Rome that MP Rocco Girlanda once headed was very busy passing messages; and I know from my own career that thousands of fixes get done by middle-level factotums, about which the top guys (here Hillary Clinton) are deiiberately kept ignorant.

Avoiding a protracted extradition fight was also likable to the Renzi government. It was very strange that the ill-qualified Fifth Chambers got the final appeal. So if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it MAY be a duck; but full proof is not in yet.

***

Corruption is undenied here. But also there is a tremendous and very brave fight going on to push back against it - and more widely against the mafia, rogue masons, and corrupt politicians.

The main venue is the courts, as judges and prosecutors are very constrained by the rules from speaking out or running counter-PR campaigns.

This is one major reason why so many of us here you included remain fascinated and doing what we can to help the good guys.

The Hellmann verdict was mostly reversed and he himself was pushed out. Judges Marasca & Bruno have been ridiculed and sidelined. De Nunzio looks foolish. Mignini is vindicated and an Italian hero.

And these various investigations and trials continue.

When will the fat lady sing? It will be a while yet, but all my own bets are on the good guys winning. And RS and AK and many others vastly diminished or punished terminally.

The best thing is that these two sub human murderers can’t help but be in the spotlight. If they had simply faded away then most people would have forgotten. Luckily and by their own undoing their ego insists that they be in the spotlight all the time. That’s good because it will eventually bring about their end. For me it can’t happen soon enough. There is no escape from what you do it this life because every event has consequences and the ripples of your actions continue.

That’s some hilarious attempts at dancing from Knox there. Hard to imagine someone with less natural rhythm than that really. She loves to use those sharp elbows Peter is always talking about when she’s dancing. Marking her territory like a feral cat.

All she needed to complete the look was an “open for business” sign around her neck. Where oh where was her fiancé during this jamboree?

@earthling @davidmulhern Agreed. It was a clownish simulacrum of sexual ecstasy carried out by Robocop. You don’t need to be an expert in body language to infer the less than subtle signals being emitted here. It sums up the attention seeking clunkiness a treat. “Look at ME everybody! I am Amanda just being Amanda!”

It’s perhaps helpful to repeat what most of us know. Knox is a serial accuser…

True Justice is a self-funded, professional-run website. Main posters own the copyright.
A ton of money and effort has been sunk into document acquisition, translations, and getting it right.
Major further use should be based on asking our okay and on requesting we peer-review.
Contact: Email Us Or write us: Editor, True Justice, PO Box 578, Times Square, New York NY 10108.